Power Structures in the Community
First, let me clarify that I am a "she". Not bothered by the male reference, but wanted to maintain that "truth in advertisement" thing. ;)
Second, I believe that I am not talking about religious discussions, just recognizing the potential in certain communities that the mosque can take the place of other recognized secular power structures in a community.
As I once posited to an acquaintance, if tomorrow something catastrophic occurred, regular services desisted and the government was either non-existent, unable or unwilling to provide food, health, education and security, leaving your community isolated, what people or organizations would you look to or organize around in order to provide the same for your community?
My theory is that people will naturally gravitate towards existing organizational or power structures for guidance. In our community, we are outside of the "incorporated" city limits so our only "security" is the county sheriffs department. Our mayor is technically downtown, over 40 minutes away. In a catastrophe that limited or eliminated contact, he would be fairly unhelpful. We have a few people in community watch. We have a few people who are recognized in the community.
Organizations in our community that might be helpful are the five churches, the VFW, American Legion and a few other groups. That doesn't mean that all citizens in the community would gravitate towards these and there may be some overlap, but there are certainly groups that perform some organization within the community.
Recognizing that, in a small community there are formal and informal power structures. A Mosque might be one of these formal organizing structures.
What we have to determine is how much power or organizing force does the mosque exert in the community? Is there another formal or informal power structure within the community? Can we work with the mosque if it is the only formal power structure without engaging directly in ideological discussions? While we build secular power structures?
And, in terms of ideology, without directly engaging it, aren't we, by working with them and insuring their continuity, showing that we are the ones that will allow them to practice their religion (ie, freedom of religion in a democracy) as opposed to the extremists that will force their views on them? What better way to convey that than to insure it?
I would say that we should be careful in not propping up the mosque as a power structure if it is not and to not enforce it too much against our ability to set up a secular power structure.
I'm just saying, I don't think we should abandon it because it is too prickly.
Power Structures in the Community
Quote:
If not, go even more slowly and do your homework ==and I mean specifically on the mosque and community as well as general studies.
I think this is why I posed it as a "power structure" or "organization" of the community issue. Noting consistently, that we should identify its role in the community to determine what exactly we should do to engage.
One point I made on the blog post on the subject and will now make here:
Whatever its role in the community, by not engaging the mosque, even if it is not "activist" like a Shia controlled mosque or religious leaders, we are leaving space in the "human terrain" of the community for the enemy to exploit.
Regardless of whether it is "activist" or not, the church/mosque/temple etc has a voice of authority in communities among a large portion of it.
I am reminded of a few situations:
Hanifa Mosque in Baghdad that routinely broadcast Anti-American messages from the loudspeakers, housed insurgents and cached weapons. We were so fearful of engaging there that we let that go for several years before they finally arrested the Imam (I believe that is what happened, though he was eventually let go).
Secondly, Ramadi and Fallujah both report that the enemy either coerced or convinced the mosques there to do the same.
did we leave exploitable human terrain because of that fear? and, how many of our men and women paid the price for that? (Not to be confrontational, but you see where I am coming from; this isn't all academic, philosophical sociology here; it has a direct impact).
Caution, yes. Dread, no.
More, From Captain's Journal
Engaging The Mosque -- the social dimension
I believe it is important to keep the various roles of the mosque separate, in part because there are some roles, such as the purely religious, where we don't really want to engage and there are others, such the social and economic where it's important in COIN to engage them.
As Tom pointed out there is no such thing as a cookie cutter mosque. However you can say broadly that every mosque has a social and economic component -- with the amount of influence in the community varying widely.
We need to understand what we are engaging, but we need to engage with most mosques in COIN areas.
A lot of COIN operations go against a warfighter's grain. But that doesn't make them any less important.
I think the difference possibly revolves around the relatively
and almost infinitesimally small number of westerners who get really worked up about such usage of any religious building including their own and the seemingly quite large number of Muslims who make a very large and very public noise about the sanctity of Islamic religious edifices -- but only when the violators of said sanctity happen to be non-muslims...
You've spent more time in the Middle east than I have, most likely. Surely you've noticed the dual standard of behavior, the punctiliousness if westerners are present and distinct lack thereof among themselves...
Warning: unplanned rant follows...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Rex Brynen
Yes, its a good thing we Westerners never used church steeples as forward observer or sniper locations, or
fortified abbeys, during WWII ;)
From what I've read, it was pretty much SOP as the US army moved across Europe in WWII (and those who have been to Germany will understand this completely), get your forward observer to the treeline overseeing the next valley, take out the village church steeple first, then lay down an artillery barrage to suppress any potential defensive fires, and then dash across to gain the next position that you could observe fires from. Sounds like there were very few church steeples left on any line of advance by war's end.
But that is moot to the issue being discussed here.
Americans take an insanely conflicted position on Islam. On one hand we blame the 9/11 attacks and the GWOT in general on Islam ("Extremist Islamic Ideology is the strategic center of gravity"), on the other hand we bend over backward to accomodate our Western perceptions of Islam as we enter their lands to conduct military operations (policies on alcohol, mosques, etc).
One personal example. Shortly after Saddam invaded Kuwait, I was on a C-5 enroute to Saudi Arabia. We stopped at Dover, Delaware after leaving Ft Campbell, KY prior to heading overseas. Stations were set up to confiscate any potential contraband prior to heading into this state that sees itself as the keeper of Islam. On the list of offensive items that U.S. soldiers were expected to surrender prior to deploying into a combat zone? The Bible.
I am no fan of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia; but it embarrasses me how we subjugate ourselves to serve their will out of our fear that they might somehow cut us off from the oil we need so desperately for our economy.
Saudis believe that any form of physical or technical labor is conducted by lower class people. They consider the American engineers who have designed the oil extraction systems that are the basis of their economy as well as the American soldiers who fight and die to preserve their borders in much the same light as they consider the Bangladeshi, Philippino or Pakistani laborer who empties their trash.
The Saudi Royal Family fears their own populace, and they fear Iran. They play the U.S. against both in order to protect the status that they have codified for themselves in their Constitution. They see it as their right to use us as hired security to sustain their arrogant and corrupt lifestyle.
The biggest threat to American national interests is not an Iran that has a government that resists the efforts of the U.S. to contain the regional influence that they have traditionally held, but with a populace that is largely pro-American. The biggest threat to American national interests is a Saudi government that holds itself out publicly as an ally, but that uses us as a hedge against their own dissatisfied populace and against a long suppressed Shia populace, both internal and external to the Kingdom. Worth considering, that Iranians are seeking legitimate nationalist goals, and their populace is frustrated that America seems hardset to prevent the same. The Saudi Populace, on the other hand, sees breaking U.S. support to the King as being phase one to any successful revision of their own governance at home.
This has little to do with religion, that is just the facade they hide behind because they fully understand how it throws us Americans for a loop.
I realize this is a bit of a rant, but I'm really fed up with how we are being treated by the Saudi Royal family, and also by how our own government has submitted to the same. Maybe I'm just still pissed because some little Airman, acting on orders of my own government, asked me to surrender my Bible. I still have my Bible, by the way.
Non-military engagement with mosques
I've just stumbled across this thread and on a quick scan it meanders slightly. In other threads there are posts on engagement with mosques in the USA, notably by the FBI.
There is quite a bit of literature now on non-military aspects of 'Engaging the Mosque' or community policing for counter-terrorism; usually as sub-sections of papers on counter-radicalisation and the potential pitfalls - in the UK and USA.
In the UK a good portion of the research is by a team based at the University of Birmingham, here an example:http://www.ahrc.ac.uk/News/Latest/Do...y%20Report.pdf
Their (new) website is:http://www.pcct-hub.org/
Not immediately found alas there are guides on the etiquette of visiting a mosque and initial steps in trying to build a relationship.
Engaging the mosque, not guiding the mosque
Quote:
Originally Posted by
francois
What we should want to be careful of is empowering the mosque beyond its established role. We still want to set up a secular government, security and economic structure. If we support the mosque beyond its existing role, we could actually alienate it from the public and cause the reverse of the "human terrain" issue above. Or, equally, once it is empowered and we depart. Who might move in to exploit that power?
Francois,
Engaging the mosque is not "one size fits all" and in the Small Wars context there are very different situations. A mosque in Dearborn, Michigan is not like a mosque in Kandahar, Afghanistan nor in the suburbs of Paris.
I don't recall anyone in this thread seeking to empower a mosque beyond its established role - very few mosques say in B'ham, UK want to have anything to do with governance or social improvement. Others want to with their congregation push their role, by providing full-time education at secondary level.
As for:
Quote:
We still want to set up a secular government, security and economic structure.
Perhaps for some, somewhere in a foreign land, in Dearborn?
Engaging the mosque wherever it occurs we, as outsiders and most likely non-Muslims too, seek to exchange views, gain understanding, respect and just maybe some partnership. The biggest gain is by listening.
What is a mosque's established role?
Graphei asked:
Quote:
I'm a bit curious as to what you're all referring to when you say a "mosque's established role?"
I too went on a journey to reach a level of understanding, which is still far from adequate, but sufficient to enable my own engagement. For a long time even though policing a multi-ethnic and multi-religious area of Birmingham I had next to nothing to do with mosques and very few exchanges with the public on their faith. After time in Pakistan I knew a little more; mosques were visited for their architecture.
Skip forward I was lucky to have time to read, meet Muslims without conflict who knew I was a police officer and listen to others explain their views on the Jihad, not the Muslim faith.
Then I met several Muslims who wanted to explain themselves and it progressed from mutual points of interest to some conversations about their faith. One mosque repeatedly made me welcome, with invitations to Iftar and courses on understanding Islam.
In my journey it was clear each mosque had their common ground on enabling their faith - which I would describe as their 'established role' - but differed over interpretation. There is a wide divergence beyond that role, for example some play an active part in the wider community, encouraging voting and hosting non-Muslim organisations within mosque grounds on public safety and public health.
I think pushing the boundaries of the 'established role' depends on a wide range of factors. In the local context here, what language Fridays prayers are conducted in can attract or repel converts.